Reposted by Dr. Jill Stein🌻
Ken Klippenstein
@kenklippenstein
·
462d
The statement criticizes the U.S. military's perceived lack of concern for American citizens, referencing a conversation about the Pentagon's awareness of attacks in Lebanon. The tone is highly critical and uses strong language to express frustration and disillusionment with the military's actions or priorities.
- The statement uses strong language that could be considered harmful or inflammatory, potentially violating the principle of striving to do no harm with words and actions. [-2]Principle 1:I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
- The statement does not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech, but the use of strong language could be seen as disrespectful. [-1]Principle 2:I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.
- The statement does not promote understanding, empathy, or compassion; it is more focused on expressing frustration and criticism. [-2]Principle 3:I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
- The statement does not engage in constructive criticism or dialogue; it is more of a blanket condemnation of the military without offering a path for constructive engagement. [-2]Principle 4:I will engage in constructive criticism and dialogue with those in disagreement and will not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments.
- The statement uses the platform to criticize a public institution, which can be seen as an attempt to hold it accountable, but the approach is not constructive.Principle 6:I will use my influence for the betterment of society.
- The statement exercises free speech but does so in a manner that may not be considered responsible or with integrity due to the strong language used. [-1]Principle 7:I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.